Treaties, Agreements, Aboriginal Rights! A place to post useful information regarding treaty talks and ongoing treaty issues. Modern-Day Treaties and First Nations and Tribal Historic Treaty Issues, as well as Agreements to Advance First Nations interestsE-Mail us at turtleislandnativenetwork@gmail.com

"Our peace and friendship treaties did not surrender our Aboriginal title to our lands," stressed George Ginnish, chief of Mi'gmawe'l Tplu'tagnn Inc. (formerly known as the Assembly of First Nations Chiefs) and the chief of Eel Ground First Nation.Chief of Mi'gmawe'l Tplu'tagnn Inc. George Ginnish and Gordon Labillois, representing Eel River Bar, were among several aboriginal interveners at the National Energy Board hearings in Saint John on Wednesday. (Connell Smith/CBC)"The Energy East pipeline will cross through our unceded Mi'qmaq traditional lands, which we hold Aboriginal title to. Thus the project will require our consent," Ginnish said.

"Our relationship with the land, waters and resources is the foundation of our identity as First Nations people," he said.

And I believe it’s Mr. Roger Hunka who is presenting on their behalf. And Mr. Hunka, before you begin if you could just kindly confirm that you had the opportunity to either be sworn or affirmed when you registered on arrival today? MR. HUNKA: Yes, I have been. Thank you. I’ll just organize my office. MR. HUNKA: Well, thank you very much, Members of the Board, the Proponents, Board members and staff. And of course I’ll thank the Mi’kmaq and the Maliseet for being on their traditional ancestral homelands. My presentation will focus on the Aboriginal -- in the Aboriginal context. And with me is Chief Grace Conrad of the Native Council of Nova Scotia. The Chief of the New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council isn’t here today but she’ll be at the hearings in Fredericton. But the Maritime Aboriginal Peoples Council was formed way back in the early eighties and it’s a regional body consisting of the Native Council of Nova Scotia, the New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council, and the Native Council of Prince Edward Island. And the council was formed in the early seventies, ’72 for NBPAC and ’74 for the council, Native Council, and then ’75 for Native Council of PEI. And the communities they represent are the offreserve Mi’kmaq, Malecite-Passamaquoddy Aboriginal peoples continuing throughout their traditional ancestral homelands in the three Maritime provinces which make up parts of Mi’kma’ki. And I’ll start by saying that what we have today is a very, very, very, very deficient application for a certificate of public convenience or necessity. It lacks many, many elements. I won’t go through all of the elements but the most basic element that it lacks is the approach to consultation. The issue on the terminal is what I’ll focus on, and the areas of oversight. And somehow we need to establish what these preparatory hearings are about because I thought there would be some answers to questions, and in 15 minutes I have 16 questions which I know will not be answered so when will be answered? And if they’re not going to be answered today, and some of them are overarching questions, then it will be taking longer times at the actual hearings. And what does the Board receive at this time as evidence other than the verbal public record, you know, what documents do you want to receive? But leave that as it is. The “in consultation” we heard the Proponent today use that term, as well as yesterday, but has it factored or is it used in a term recognizing the significance of Aboriginal people and Section 25, the non-abrogation and nonderogation clauses in the Constitution Act of Canada; is the Proponent aware of that? Is the Proponent aware of the requirements under part two, Section 35 of the Constitution Act of Canada 1982 as to the conduct of proponents or governments when they’re consulting with or entering into negotiations with the Aboriginal peoples of Canada? And are they aware of the notes or the suggestions in the royal proclamation on how to proceed with consultation with the Indigenous peoples? Is the Proponent aware of the NEB guidelines that were prepared several years ago, or if not a decade and a half ago, with the blueprint virtually of how to approach Aboriginal communities, groups, and peoples and conduct consultation? Is the Proponent aware of the INAC public statement on the approach to consultation and accommodation, and why the Government of Canada considers it vital and very important to have a true honest meaningful transparent process of consultation? In other words, a long-term working relationship in the area of consultation. And also the last point, is the Proponent -- and I’ll also raise this to NEB -- aware of your obligations and your obligations, both your obligations, that there is a oversight Crown responsibility to ensure that this is happening, and that the Proponent is part of Canadian society that has to ensure that it is also trying its best to enter into a consultation that accommodates the interests and needs of Aboriginal peoples’ assertions? And I refer to that as the leading cases or the Supreme Court of Canada decisions in Haida clearly where the justice, Madam Justice herself, indicated that the assertions of Crown sovereignty and the assertions of Aboriginal sovereignty can only be reconciled through consultation. And we know that in the Maritimes here as a public record it’s known that we have -- the Mi’kmaq do have treaty rights over lands, over water, over resources, ant there are outstanding comprehensive land claims. So for the Proponent, when you enter Mi’kma’ki I would suggest that the rules are very, very different and very, very precise. And I would suggest that you still have a lot of homework to do. I was disappointed to hear from the Chief of the New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council that their effort or their attempt to engage with the Proponent met with sort of a -- well, it didn’t meet; it wasn’t favourably received. In other words, he couldn’t get anywhere to have a good sit down and explain or learn about the project. I think we’re all here listening today and listening yesterday, and I hope the next few days changes and I hope the tenure changes as you progress towards Hamilton the other part of the world -- that the Proponent realizes how important it is to really undertake consultation in a manner that explains clearly in a very transparent way what the project really is. What do you really want? At least from our point of view, what do you want from us? What parts, what lands, what waters, what trees, what animals; what do you really want? And for what purpose is it, you know, a real purpose? And with that how far or what are you prepared -- I’ll start over. Are you prepared to accommodate the interests and the needs and ameliorate some of the effects? Because I think any project has an effect on the land or the water, as we heard from Sheila from Local 7 of the Saint John’s Chapter of the New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council. And any effort, any project affects the land so -- but you need to -- you can ameliorate the effects if you really want to do that. I do have information and NBAPC is prepared to share that information. I’m prepared to share the information as to the numbers of Aboriginal people who live off reserve in New Brunswick and in Nova Scotia. I’m prepared to share with you information about the treaty relationships. I’m prepared to share information as to some of the issues that I raise in my correspondence. For example, how can you deal with the area of compensation for all Aboriginal peoples, not only just the off reserve but on the reserve if you don’t know how many persons are exercising their treaty right for food, social, ceremonial, or what we call treaty liberties of access to the flora and the fauna and the fishes and so forth? That goes to the heart of the issue, issue number 15. The Board asked the financial implications of a spill. Does the Proponent know how many Aboriginal persons have Aboriginal communal commercial fishing licences? Does the Proponent know the distinct difference between an Aboriginal communal commercial fishing licence and a regular commercial fishing licence? The cost, the value to a community -- you can’t begin to plan contingency liabilities or how you’re going to compensate for that without knowing who and what and how. I’m prepared to share that information but I’m only prepared to share it if the Proponent at least wants to seriously enter into a relationship at least with the NBAPC -- we’re regional maps, yeah, I help; I just help. Sometimes I hinder but most of the time I try to help. You know, if you want to enter into a relationship, to sit down and talk about the issues that they have -- and we have in Nova Scotia -- we have our community does fish the Bay of Fundy and it’s a very important resource fishery. So I’m prepared to share that but we need to have some sign from the Proponent that they’re prepared to do that. The questions I have, there are 16 of them. They were listed in the -- as requested by the Board. I put them in. I guess you won't be able to answer all of them, and if you don’t answer them, I guess I could again, put them in as evidence or ask them some other time, in the fall time, whatever it is. But there is one that bothers me, because I haven't really got a handle on it, and it's the one about the terminal. Say you got all of this bitumen moving through this pipe, and it finally ends up in your terminal -- at the terminal. Well, at that terminal, it's held in -- at that terminal, there's going to be obviously holding tanks, so who really owns that bitumen in those holding tanks? That's the first question. Number two: When you're going to be shipping that bitumen overseas, the crude, through the terminal system -- the $300 million terminal where the boats are going to come in, the ships -- who then is responsible for arranging for the sale or shipment of that bitumen? Is it the same person who has it in their tanks or is it another organization or person? And then obviously, the third -- which I think is obvious, but I really don’t know -- once the carrier has all of the bitumen in their hold and signs off, anchors aweigh, I guess it's the carrier's responsibility, which is -- then goes into Maritime law. But the first two questions, I still don’t have a clear answer: who owns that bitumen in the tanks and who is responsible for making the arrangements for the shipment of that crude? 5531. Those would be useful to me, and you got 6 minutes and 31 seconds to answer. MR. VAN DER PUT: It's a very succinct answer, so the shippers who sign transportation contracts with Energy East to transport their crude oil -- could be diluted bitumen, could be light oil, any type of oil -- are the entities who own the crude oil once it's in the storage tanks in the Energy East tank terminal. And then as well, the same shippers are responsible for arranging for transportation of that crude oil from the Canaport Energy East Marine Terminal to their ultimate destinations. MR. HUNKA: Thank you very much. So then it goes to the next question from that. In the event of a mishap -- which we hope shouldn't happen -- who do we call? Who would the Native Council of Nova Scotia or New Brunswick Aboriginal People's Council or any stakeholder or right holder call for -- in the event of a mishap and they wanted to deal with it somehow, for compensation or understand what's happening. Who would they approach then? MR. VAN DER PUT: In the unlikely event of an incident, let's say at the marine terminal, that is caused by the operation of that marine terminal, it would be Energy East, as the holder of the certificate of public convenience and necessity as per the National Energy Board Act, that would be responsible. So Energy East would be the one that you would want to call in that event. MR. HUNKA: It's going on again. All right, thank you on that. And the other issue -- I've still got a few more minutes -- is the Proponent aware of Transport Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada as well as Environment Canada and the Canadian Coast Guard, launching these four pilot projects on oil -- in other words, on preparedness, oil spill preparedness? It's just been launched a few months ago. And are you aware that they are looking at one -- well, two of the pilot areas? One is Port Hawkesbury and one is this whole Saint John's harbour/Bay of Fundy area. And basically, it's gathering information to see in their oil preparedness plan how this should act and so forth. Are you aware of that ongoing planning? MR. VAN DER PUT: Yes. Energy East is aware of that plan, and we also did notify all of the First Nations that we're engaging with with regards to that program taking place so that they were aware of that. MR. HUNKA: And just as a follow up, First Nations were referred to; obviously, our reserves, but there's also the other off-reserve. So just to -- if you get involved and touch base with NBAPC or the Native Council Nova Scotia, I would suggest they are aware of it and actually, they're feeding into it and they have a fair amount of information that would be very useful to both the governments themselves doing the project, but also that would be willing to share that with you as far as the preparedness and fishing and local coasts and so forth, which would be very valuable for you to have. And I would prepare -- I know they would share that with you. 5539. One last question: I know it's hard to predict employment opportunities and education opportunities, and that's on everyone's mind, and I know that you have -- you're in -- if you're coming to a very depressed part of the world -- well, I think Alberta's depressed too now. But you know, you are -- you're joining us or catching up with us. Well anyways, we're quite depressed as far as employment and we have a lot of educated youth, non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal. I'm just wondering if -- I'm not asking you to make targets, but I'm somehow suggesting, is Energy East considering, you know, to ensure that there's Aboriginal candidates or Aboriginal youth or elder persons who do want to work or get trained, have some opportunity? Is there going to be some sort of a call through their either band councils or the Native councils, "Hey, we want to talk to you", or "We're interested"? There's not -- no guarantee, but there's a hope? Is there going to be some sort of a effort on that part? MR. VAN DER PUT: The answer is an emphatic yes, we're putting a lot of effort into that, actually, currently. I'll ask Mr. Matossian to just very briefly, in the time remaining, to just provide you a couple of examples of some of the initiatives we have underway. MR. MATOSSIAN: Thank you, Mr. Van der Put. We are very aware of the importance of training, employment contracting opportunities for First Nations. Although the majority of those opportunities occur during their construction phase, there have been some notable developments of late. We've made investments into the joint economic developments labour market studies, which look at the supply side of labour pool in First Nations communities and would hopefully identify areas of training gap that would require further investment. We are considering support of an Indigenous trades and apprenticeships program at the moment, which would be the logical follow on of that. TransCanada has an Aboriginal employment contracting program. We have been putting that into demonstration here in the Maritimes. We had -- with field work that we've been conducting over the past two years, we've had a total of 24 Indigenous field program participants in a range of roles. The level of participation that we achieved last year was 45 percent, which I think is very notable. We have -- this year, that ratio may increase. We are going after building capacity and building careers instead of just filling jobs for the season, if you will. And I think it's important to mention that we've also been developing the capacity of First Nations or Aboriginal businesses in the Maritimes. We've been contracting out for the third season an Aboriginal business for field study work. And I could probably go on, but of course, construction is where the rubber hits the road, and as we don’t typically go for targets. What we have are called Aboriginal participation plan requirements, which put on our contractors obligations to present strategies on how they will train, recruit, and hire, retain, and further develop Aboriginal members in the delivery of those contracts. And those requirements are contractual and, you know, they are held to fulfill those requirements and they're measured on their performance. So we -- with that we -- if we were to provide a percentage, you know, that would be the ceiling and we would -- not to do any disrespect to contractors, but they probably won't go higher than the ceiling. So this provides the ability to -- for businesses to see the strategic importance of maximizing Aboriginal participation and going for higher levels. Just a last point, we will have some designated or targeted services that we have yet to decide, but those have typically involved camps clearing, medical and security. Those are in addition to the areas in mainstream that we would maximize participation, and these are targeted areas for qualified Aboriginal businesses as well. Thank you. MR. HUNKA: All right, thank you very much. And again, I didn’t want to put you on notice but I guess I did. Somebody has to once in a while. Anyways, I do hope that when I'm here again in the fall time -- I think you said September of -- you're going to have the hearing start again to actually have evidence filed and everything else around that time --- THE CHAIRMAN: Sorry, I cut you off there, I thought you had finished, I apologize. The other steps where you can participate in as an intervenor, there will be information requests in 2017 that you can participate in. There will be oral traditional evidence. We have sent a letter out recently indicating we’re coming back to New Brunswick to hear oral traditional evidence because our timing right now -- when we asked the communities was not perfect for them. And also if you look at the Hearing Order, you’ll see all of these steps put forth. And I just looked at your list of questions and I suspect that you have a few items that you might want to communicate during our hearings. MR. HUNKA: Yes, I am. And I hope that by that time there’ll be a working relationship with the bands and native councils so that I won't be so rough on them. Thank you very much. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you again. And again I apologize for hitting the kill button here.

Pabineau First Nation Oral presentation and Q&A session Transcript

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Oinpegitjoig is how we say that in our language. My name is Chief David Peter-Paul. I am from the Pabineau First Nation, a small First Nation community situated in Northern New Brunswick. It’s a Mi'kma community of a little over 300 band members and -- it’s about 320 some members and we’ve been situated in the Bathurst Harbour area along the Nepisiguit River for as long as we can remember. Of course directly linked to a number of other First Nations communities, I have relatives as far as Listuguj First Nation, Gesgapegiag, Eel River Bar, Eel Ground, Red Bank, Esgenoopetitj, and Elsipogtog First Nations. I have relatives in each and every one of them. So as you can see, we travelled a bit over the years and our families have immigrated from each of the various First Nation communities now established as Indian Reservations. And of course, that immigration took place because we were, for time immemorial, very nomadic and travelled and followed the seasons and followed the moose and followed the salmon. So that’s been our way of life and continues to this day. The community I come from and the general core of the community, which is within Mi’kma’ki. Mi’kma’ki is all of the land of the Mi’kmaq where our Mi’kmaq reside and that includes New Brunswick. It includes Quebec. It includes the State of Maine. It includes Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland, and well, of course, the entire Province of New Brunswick. Since time immemorial, we’ve shared this territory. And if you examine any of the history that has been recorded by our people, at least that history you will see that we have covered this territory and have become very familiar -- our ancestors have become very familiar with the entire region of Mi’kma’ki because of the trade, because of the agreements we had, because of the seven Mi’kmaq districts, and the intertwining of our needs and representing ourselves on issues of common interest, and of course with our communications with the Crown. So our travels are far and wide and much farther than actually what is now established as Indian Reservations. Our community is situated in an area that we’ve become familiar with as being Winpegijawik-ewagi (ph). Winpegijawik is the former word for the Nepisiguit River. I guess the French and the English had difficulty pronouncing Winpegijawik and they called it Nepisiguit. And so that’s how that name has evolved over time. So I am proudly a Mi’kmaq from Winpegijawik, Winpegijawik-ewagi. The river that flows through the very centre of my community is Winpegijawik, which the literal meaning is “roughly flowing” because there are so many dangerous stretches of river along the river. And I think our elders likely told our children that as sort of a didactic way of, you know, letting them know that, “There is some danger here and you must be careful because we’ve lost some of your families over time.” So I come from Winpegijawik-ewagi. And before I begin getting into my presentation, I just wanted to -- I guess I have an hour and half I was told? No, I guess I have 20 minutes, sorry. I just wanted you to know that I’m very appreciative of the opportunity to be able to speak to you and address the National Energy Board and to speak to Energy East and Irving representatives here today and to be able to share my thoughts on any impacts that we might feel are important to us that we need to examine. And that’s what we’re here to do, is to understand them. I mean, we’re talking about a $15.7 million project that’s going to transport 1.1 million barrels of oil per day, which represents about 400 million barrels per year from oil-rich Alberta to New Brunswick and some of which will be refined locally in this part of our territory, and some of which will be exported. So we understand that part of it. That part we don’t have any questions on other than the general specifics and logistics of how that is going to happen and also any risks and what mitigative factors are under consideration to ensure that we have a safe operation indefinitely into the future. Not just in year in or year two, but 20 years from now and 30 years and 100 years from now, where will we be? So I didn’t come here today to question the economic benefits to Canada or to the Province of New Brunswick specifically. I didn’t come here today to question whether the pipeline is the safest mode of transport for oil. I think that science can prove some of those things. I’m not disputing that. I’m not here to question whether this pipeline is going to reduce the import of crude oil into the country and whether or not we can increase our international market share for the product. I’m not questioning that. I’m not here to do that. I’m here today to inform you of some very simple things that are very important on our minds. The Mi’kmaq people have much -- to understand this. This is an import part of my message, is that the Mi’kmaq people have lived upon and we’ve drawn our sustenance from these lands since time immemorial. 5018. I know that we have a number of very good people here presenting today that have a long history of living in the Saint John River or along the route and I respect them people greatly. They have a strong -- the people that we have operations -- the lady that -- the respectful lady that just presented before me talked about her home. And of course those are things that are very near and dear to every one of our hearts and if it was your home, of course you would be concerned as well. But we’ve lived here on this land and we’ve drawn our sustenance from this land since time immemorial. And we will continue to do that; that’s what Mi’kma’ki -- there’s a sense of pride we have in what is ours. And the Mi’kmaq and Maliseet are signatories of Peace and Friendship Treaties. And some people maybe perhaps within the National Energy Board may be familiar more so with the treaties out west, the numbered treaties where there was actually land ceded in exchange for particular programs and services and guarantees. We live in a unique situation -- not so unique; you’ll find that out further west and also here in the east. We’ve not ceded any territory here. We still believe that as unceded territory and our treaties being merely Peace and Friendship Treaties, these lands are our -- they belong to us. That’s a sense that our people have about all of Mi’kma’ki. All of that region I just described from Quebec to New Brunswick and the State of Maine and Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland -- all of those areas are very, very important to us. And so we have to, with all of our conscience, try to make sure that if this project is a go -- and I’m not saying we oppose it; we want to become familiar with it more. But if this is a go, we have to comfortable with the fact that we have some security around what’s going to happen to our lands and our waters. And that is going to take some time and it’s going to take some consultation. It’s going to take some effort on both of our parts to know. And we’re willing -- we’re at that table with you. Our treaties were not designed only to recognize, but they were also there to protect our rights and to protect the very land that you intend to use for this project. That I want to be known right from the very beginning. These rights are protected not only within -- well, within the Canadian Constitution, but recognized and affirmed through the Supreme Court of Canada, many cases. And I can list them if you would like but I don’t think I have to. Tomorrow there’s a number of fellow Mi’kmaq chiefs that are going to be here to ask further questions. I’m the first one here today, not because I’m special, not because I occupy any particular position or rank within our chiefs. It’s because of convenience for timing and being the lateness of our application to present I’m here today. But they’re going to ask a number of questions. So I’m going to limit my questions to about three. And they’re very simple, nothing to be afraid of. But they’re very simple questions. Chief George Ginnish will be here tomorrow. He represents Mi’gmawel Tplu’tagnn which is our organization that is created to represent the nine Mi’kmaq communities in the Province of New Brunswick, and he's going to be talking about the Peace and Friendship Treaties and how unique those treaties are, those number of treaties that we have with the Crown, and how that -- how they protect very clearly the rights of our people. So he'll go into those details. I don’t need to do that. There's lots of time tomorrow for that. He's also going to be discussing the concept of Aboriginal title, which is a complicated thing for government to get their heads around, and also industry, I assume, as well. So I'm not going to get into that today. The important thing is that you understand that when Aboriginal title is in question, there is the element of consent that is so incredibly important when you go through this process of getting this project approved. You have to reach out to the First Nations people, for not only their understanding of your project, not only a comprehension of how you intend to mitigate loss or risk, but also the -- it's so important that you understand that consent is something that you must consider. You must be reaching for that, and I -- and that is my hope, that we're -- that's the goal that we're reaching for. I prefaced my welcoming remarks to you in telling you that -- welcome you -- welcoming all of you to the land of the Mi’kmaq, the traditional territory, the Mi’kmaq, and there's been some question within the provincial government as to whether or not the Saint John area and the Saint John River valley actually is Mi’kmaq territory, but I can confirm and I can share with you -- and you probably -- may -- or you may or you may not -- some of your legal team may be aware of a court case that I was personally involved in back in 2006 where I was charged for hunting a deer on the Saint John River. And it was my nephew and I. It was the Crown v. Peter-Paul and Peter-Paul. And in that case, I had an expert witness, former Chief Albert Levi from the Elsipogtog First Nation, who served there for 26 years as the faithful chief to his community. Albert Levi was very much in tune and in touch with his elders, and he told stories to the court. He was admitted as an expert witness and he told stories to the court about what his ancestors told him, what his grandfather and great-grandfather and great-uncle and all of his family members told him of the travels of the Mi’kmaq and how they would travel from the Elsipogtog area. And my grandfather, Stephen Peter-Paul, Egyoung Peter Paul, was actually from Elsipogtog. That's my great-great grandfather, so I've got blood in Elsipogtog as well. So my people travelled through the Richibucto River; portaged over to the Salmon River; from the Salmon River, travelled into the Great Grand Lake; from Grand Lake, travelled into Jemseg; and travelled up the Saint John River. Once they reached the Saint John River, they fished salmon and they fished trout and they fished bass. They fished. Then this is something that's occurred over as long as can be remembered. They would travel as a large collective of families, each family represented on an annual journey. Once they fished and caught the fish and smoked the fish and dried them and brought them back down -- had them ready to transport again, they would travel by canoe along the shoreline all the way down to the mouth of the Saint John River, and they would travel from there and down along the mouth of the Saint John River, they used to collect wren eggs. I don't know if you know what a wren is, but it's a bird. It's a little bird that makes -- that the eggs were a delicacy to my people. And they timed their journey when they would leave in the spring. By the time they would get to the islands that they would find the wren eggs on, they made sure that they arrived just as they were nesting. And they would eat them. That was a delicacy. That was a special, special, special treat, so they would always time it in accordance with that. And so our occupation and use of the Saint John River, I want you to recognize, is very clear. It's in our history. Check it out, check out the court docket when I went to court back in 2006, and look at the history. So that's an important message, I think, that you need to have, is that we are as important a feature of this consultative process as any other First Nations people in this province. This history is documented among our people, and we have elders that can tell you the same story today. Chief Albert Levi could share it with you. When you visit with Elsipogtog, it's important that you get this story and make it clear, make it clear, at least within your minds. So important thing is, we're talking about unceded Mi’kmaq territory and Maliseet territory. None of this has been ceded because of the Peace and Friendship Treaties. I'm running out time. And we've always exercised our rights within -- across this territory. I still do. I still hunt and fish and trap within the Fredericton region. And it quite simply means that we have to start talking, not only about consultation, but trying to reach that type of consent that's required to make sure this project goes, if it goes at all. Ultimately, that's going to take a lot of consultation and communication. So I've got a question. I'm running out of time. I've got three and a half minutes. And there's chiefs will be bringing in a number of questions. It's just -- I don’t believe that there's any question in the minds of any people here in this room that the proposed Energy East Project has potential to impact the lands and waters and a number of rights associated with the Indigenous peoples of this province. I don't think there's any question. There's potential. I'm not saying it will happen, but there's potential. That's where we need to begin. As you know, the province has recently approved a number of industrial projects that have raised the attention of the good people of New Brunswick, including the energy -- the increased electrical infrastructure that's going to be required to run this project; including the Sisson Brook Mine, a tungsten molybdenum open pit mine proposed for the Napadogan; and the new forest management strategy, which includes a substantial increase in the total annual cut per year; and the reduction of deer wintering areas; and buffer zones are being reduced. Has Energy East considered these cumulative effects? In addition to your project, have you considered how cumulatively this could impact the rights of First Nations people, and what these cumulative effects might be? And what do you anticipate needs to be -- is required in order to address and mitigate for these cumulative impacts? MR. VAN DER PUT: The specific question, as I understand it, goes to consideration of cumulative effects of other projects. That is something that was looked at as part of the environmental socio-economic assessment that Stantec conducted. I will ask Mr. Lees to speak to how that was addressed. MR. LEES: Thank you, Mr. Van der Put. In the cumulative effects assessment, we look at reasonably foreseeable projects and we look at that from the context of do those projects overlap with the potential project's effects of this project? And we considered in our assessment the recognition that traditional activities occur on the landscape, and we completed our cumulative effects assessment based on that. We're still waiting on -- or hoping to gather the results of traditional knowledge studies to strengthen that assessment. I can't, at this point, tell you specifically if those were the projects that we actually looked at as part of the cumulative effects. There is a list in our application in Volume 14 that provides the list, what's called the Project Inclusion List. And information on projects that we included in our cumulative effects assessment is included on that list. MR. VAN DER PUT: Thank you, Mr. Lees. CHIEF PETER-PAUL: Oh, I wish I had more than three seconds left, but thank you very much. I appreciate the time that I -- that --- MR. VAN DER PUT: And thank you, Chief, for passing the knowledge that you passed on to us this morning. We really do appreciate that. CHIEF PETER-PAUL: You're very welcome. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Chief, and your colleagues. I'd like to maybe highlight for you, Chief David Peter-Paul, that there are other processes, since you are now an intervenor, that you can prevail yourself, such as asking information requests to the intervenor. And also, we'll be back here in New Brunswick in January for those Aboriginal communities, Indigenous people that want to talk to us about their oral -- about oral traditions or traditional evidence. So all of these steps that you can prevail yourself of if you so wish are documented in our hearing order, so I encourage you to talk with us some more if that is your wish.